Unit 4

Conflict
 Introduction

Organizational conflict refers to the condition of misunderstanding or disagreement

that is caused by the perceived or actual opposition in the needs, interests and
values among people who work together. Organizational conflict may also be
termed as workplace conflict.

Organizational conflicts are influenced by a variety of factors like the lack of

clarity in the responsibility of the team members, the interpersonal relationship that
is shared by the members of the organization. The scarcity of the needed resources
may lead to the rise of conflict between the members of the organization.

An organization consists of people with different backgrounds; as these individuals

differ in their opinions and attitudes, interaction among them often leads to
conflicts. Conflict, which can occur at individual, group or organizational levels,
discourages people from cooperating with each other. While some degree of
conflict is desirable in organizations so as to promote the spirit of competition
among employees, it put in danger the effective functioning of the organization if it
is allowed to keep at it for a long time. Therefore, it becomes essential to resolve
conflicts quickly.

 Meaning and definition

Conflict is a form of clash between individuals and groups arising out 'of opposing
ideas, perceptions, values, interests and goals. It denotes lack of understanding;
agreement, Compatibility and cordiality in people who share an environment arid
tend to come into contact with other in one way or the other in an organization for
example. It is a behavioral condition of people which affect their normal activities
and outcomes. Conflict is a common situation in the complex world we live in. It
infect is a cause and consequence of the complexity of the world we live in.

It is an element of interpersonal and inter-group relations. It exists in various

degrees, at several levels and takes different forms. It arises between individuals,
within a group of members and between groups and other similar entities. It arises
out of multiple causes and gives rise to multiple consequences.

According to David L. Austin, "It can be defined as a disagreement between two or

more individuals or groups, with each individual or group trying to gain acceptance
of its View or objectives over others."

Chung and Megginson define conflict as, "the struggle between incompatible or
struggling needs, wishes, ideas, interests or people. Conflict arises when
individuals or groups encounter goals that both parties cannot obtain
satisfactorily."

Thus, we can say that fighting, hostility and controversy, all of which can be called
conflict, are nearly everyday fare for individuals and groups, although they are not
always evident. It is an absolutely predictable social phenomenon and it should be
channeled to useful purposes.

 Influencing Factors

There are various factors that may influence the conflicts that may arise within an
organization.

Lack of clarity of responsibility – Conflict arises in a situation where the

responsibility of the employees is not clearly mentioned. In order to avoid these
situations, the responsibilities and roles of each member must be stated clearly in
advance in order to avoid such discrepancies. These discrepancies lead to conflicts
within the concern in the future (Prause & Mujtaba, 2015).

Interpersonal relationships – The issues of the interpersonal relationships among

the employees may lead to the conflicts that arise within an organization. The
difference in the personalities of the employees may at times prove helpful towards
the solving of the conflicts that arise in the workplace.

Rare resources – Inadequate resources often lead to the development of issues at

the workplace, which in the due course of time may lead to serious conflicts.
Members of an organization often compete with each other on the availability of
the resources like the materials required, the amount of money that needs to be
spent, and the time required for the completion of the task at hand.
Interest issues – The disorientation between the organizational goals and the goals
of the concerned individual may lead to a conflict. The concerned individual may
fight for his own personal goals, which in turn leads to hindrances in the overall
success of the project that the team is working on.

 Types of level of conflicts

We can predict conflict at three levels in an organization

1. Conflicts at individual level

2. Conflicts at group level

3. Conflicts at organization level

1. Conflicts at individual level

Conflicts at individual level in an organization may be viewed in two ways

Intrapersonal and interpersonal conflict

a. Intrapersonal Conflict

According to most behavioral theories, people are motivated to achieve a goal

either when meeting the goal results in the satisfaction of a need, or when the
incentives for achieving the goal are attractive. However, this is not as simple as it
seems. An individual may have conflicting needs or he may have to overcome
many barriers to achieve his goals. Thus, the process of achieving goals is a
complicated one. In the process of achieving his goals, an individual may
experience stress and frustration and may face internal conflict. This is referred to
as intrapersonal conflict.

In organizations, intrapersonal conflict can result from role ambiguity. If an

employee's roles and responsibilities are not defined clearly or if he has more than
one boss who may issue conflicting orders, he may find it difficult to prioritize his
tasks. This may also lead to intrapersonal conflict. Further, sometimes Superiors
and subordinates may have conflicting expectations from an employee. This is
especially true in the case of middle managers. Subordinates expect the manager to
present then views and support them before the top management while the top
management expects him to support them before the subordinates. Such situations
also lead to intrapersonal conflict.

b. Interpersonal Conflict

People always tries to maintain their image and respect. When Someone threatens
their self-concept, they try to retaliate and this leads to interpersonal conflict.
Different individuals have different tolerance levels, and this depends on their
personalities. Individuals with low tolerance levels get into interpersonal conflicts
frequently. Often, interpersonal conflicts are the result of differences in perception
and gaps in communication.

 Source of individuals level conflict

There are four major sources of interpersonal conflicts. These can be summarized
as follows:

Personal differences: Everyone has a unique background because of his or

her upbringing, culture and family tradition, and socialization processes. Because
no one has the same family background, education, and values, the differences can
be a major source of conflict. Disagreements originate from the differences "often
become highly emotional and take on moral overtones. A disagreement about who
is factually correct easily turns into a bitter argument over who is morally right."

Information deficiency: This source of conflict results from

communication breakdown in the organization. It may be that the two people in
conflict are using different information or that one or both have misinformation.
Unlike personal differences, this source of conflict is not emotionally charged and
once corrected, there is little resentment.

Role incompatibility: This type of interpersonal conflict draws From both

intra individual role conflict and intergroup conflict. Specifically, in today's
horizontal organizations, managers have functions and tasks that are highly
interdependent. However, the individual roles of these managers may be
incompatible. For example, the production manager and the sales manager have
interdependent functions: one supports the other. However, the role of the
production manager is to cut costs, and one way to do this is to keep inventories
low. The sales manager, on the other hand, has the role of increasing revenues
through increased sales. The sales manager may make delivery promises to
customers that are incompatible with the low inventory levels maintained by
production. The resulting conflict from role incompatibility may have to be
resolved by higher-level management or systems development through advanced
information technology.

Environmental stress: A stressful environment can amplify these types of

conflict. In environmental characterized by scarce or shrinking resources,
downsizing, competitive pressures, or high degrees of uncertainty, conflict of all
kinds will be more probable. "For example, when a major pet-food manufacturing
facility announced that one third of its managers would have to support a new third
shift, the feared disruption of personal and family routines prompted many
managers to think about sending out their resumes. In addition, the uncertainty of
who was going to be required to work at night was so great that even routine
management work was disrupted by posturing and infighting."

Conflict at intrapersonal level occurs because a smooth progression of the need-

drive-goal cycle does not occur in reality. Within every individual, there are
usually a number of competing goals and roles. Thus, an individual experiences
two types of conflict in himself: goal conflict and role conflict.

Goal Conflict

Another common source of conflict for an individual is a goal that has both
positive and negative features, or two or more competing goals. Whereas in
frustration motives are blocked before the goal is reached, in goal conflict two or
more motives block one another. For ease of analysis, three separate types of goal
conflict are generally identified:

1. Approach-approach conflicts, where the individual is motivated to approach two

or more positive but mutually exclusive goals.

2. Approach-avoidance conflict, where the individual is motivated to approach a

goal and at the same time is motivated to avoid it. The single goal contains both
positive and negative characteristics for the individual.

3.Avoidance-avoidance conflict, where the individual is motivated to avoid two or

more negative but mutually exclusive goals.
2. Conflicts at group level

Groups do exist in every organization and they affect the behaviour of their
members. In this process of interaction, there may arise two types of conflicts:

A. Intragroup Conflicts :

When conflict develops between two individual members of the same group, it is
intragroup conflict. Sometimes intragroup conflicts develop due to the following
reasons:

(a) The group faces a novel problem.

(b)A person's extra-group role gives birth to intragroup conflict, or

(c)New values are imported from the social environment

B. Inter-group Conflicts.

If groups are not involved in the conflict but when interindividual conflict between
members of two groups involves two groups then, it assumes the proportion of an
intergroup conflict.

In an organization, people from different departments compete for limited

resources such as funds, personnel and support services. This competition often
results in conflict. Sometimes, conflicts occur when one group attempts to take the
entire credit for the successful completion of a task, to the completion of which
another group may have also made significant contributions. Perceived inequitable
treatment in matters of working conditions, rewards and status, in comparison to
other groups can also lead to intergroup conflict.

3. Conflicts at organizational level

(a) Inter-organizational Conflicts.

Such conflicts are always within the organization. They may be either at individual
level or group level.

(b) Intra-organizational Conflicts.

Such conflicts take place among various organizations such as pursuing similar
objectives, conflicts between a business organization and a Government agency,
conflicts between head office and a branch office of a big business organization etc.

 Source of group conflict

Causes which lead to conflicts can be placed into three distinct categories

(a) Communicational Factors of Conflict: Lack of proper communication can be

cause of conflict. The problems of communication process may be due to:

(i) Too much or too little communication.

(ii) Filtering of communication which means that information is passed through

many levels or through many members. The amount of information is functional
upto a point, after that it becomes a source of conflict.

(iii) Semantic problems arise due to difference in background, training, perception,

and inadequate information about others with which we are talking.

(iv) Problem of noise.

(b) Behavioural Aspect of Conflict: The behavioural aspect of conflict arises out
of human thoughts and feelings, emotions and attitudes, values, perceptions and
personality traits. Some of important causes of this aspect of conflict are:

(i) Some people's value and perceptions of situations are particularly likely to
generate conflict with others.

(ii) The conflict may be based on personal basis regarding religion.

(iii) The conflict may also arise due to differing view points about various Issues.

(iv) The widening gap between "have's" and "have not's" also causes considerable
conflict.

(v)From the organizational point of view, there is conflict in organizational goals

and psychological needs of the individuals because-both.of these are inconsistent
with each other.
(c) Structural Aspect of Conflict: These conflicts arise due to structural design of
the organization like:-

(i) Larger the size of organization, more will be the chances of conflict.

(ii) Distinction between the line and staff units with in an organization is also
source of conflict.

(ii) Role ambiguity is also a cause of conflict. When the role of an individual is not
clearly defined, it will cause conflict

especially between this individual and other people depending on these activities.

(iv) Poorly designed work flow structure and poorly planned coordination is also
cause of inter-group contlict.

(V) shortage of resources may bring conflict among groups who are otherwise
peaceful at the time of submission.

(d) Personal Factors:

(i) Skills and Abilities- Workforce in an organizational department is composed of

people with varying levels of skills

and ability. Such diversity in skills and abilities leads to contlict, especially when
jobs are interdependent.

(ii) Personalities- Personality also causes individual differences. It is differences in

personality that neither the manager likes all of his co-managers and subordinates
nor all of them like the manager, mis creates conflict among them.

(iii) Values and Ethics- People hold different beliefs and adhere (cling) to different
value system.

(iv) Emotion- The moods of the people can also be a source of conflict in the work
place.

(v)Communication Barriers - Communication barriers such as physical separation

can create distortions in messages and these, in turn, can lead to conflict, value
judgement also sometimes serves as permanent barrier.
  Managing conflict

There are broadly two approaches for the management of conflict

1. Preventive approach

2. Curative approach

(i) Preventive Approach

It's an age-old saying that "Prevention is better than cure". Management cannot
altogether stop conflict, as it is unavoidable and to the some extent, desirable too,
but it can take effective steps to prevent its occurrence. Preventing a conflict is
often easier than reducing it once it begins. The techniques that can be used for
prevention of conflict are:

1. Focus on Subordinate Goals- The management should always talk in terms of

overall organizational goals and their accomplishment.

2. Well defined Structural Specifications -Ambiguities in jobs, tasks, roles, are

important sources of organizational conflicts. If they are clearly laid down,
properly defined, detailed spelt out, conflicts can be minimized. Uncertainties of
any kind should be removed.

3. Sharing of Information- A number of conflicts develop due to lack of

information or due to manipulation of available information. Misconceptions and
misperceptions among individuals and their groups can be reduced if the
information flow is free and clear.

4. Creating Win- Win situation- Conflicts within an organization should never be

perceived as gain to one party and loss to the other. All conflicts should ultimately
prove to be beneficial to the organization. So they should be viewed as individual
the parties concerned should put their heads together to find mutually beneficial
solutions.

(ii). Curative Approach

Once it becomes known that a conflict has developed, whether at the individual or
group level, it needs to be handled properly. All conflicts should ultimately prove
to be beneficial to the organization. Curative approach includes following steps:
(i) Diagnosing the issue- For diagnosing the issue, it is necessary to understand
that conflict are about, which issues or differences why it has developed, how far it
has progressed. Therefore, the first step is to find nature of conflict. Conflict may
arise due to difference in (i) goals (ii) methods (iii) values (iv) facts.

The next thing is to know, why difference between too parties have arisen. Once,
the problem is identified and its cause becomes known, the stage of its evolution
can be properly understood.

(ii) Strategies for reduction of conflict -Once a conflict has developed, and has
started showing signs of becoming dis functional, it needs to be resolved or at least
reduced in order to reduce conflict, two approaches are available-either change the
people or change their attitudes.

(iii) Implementation of strategy-Once a superior has made an assessment of the

situation and is able to select a suitable conflict-handling mode he should take all
the concerned people into confidence.

Power
Similar to 'energy' in Physics, power is a fundamental concept in social Sciences.
Power is the most important and unyielding necessity of organizational life. The
concept of power is universally used but least studied. It is relatively a neglected
area devoid of substantial empirical work. Darwin Cartright asserts that power is a
neglected variable in social psychology. Social scientists so far have been 'soft' on
power.

Some people see power as something they receive from an external source. This
could be an assigned title or position that gives someone control and authority over
others.

Other people believe power is an innate quality that can be cultivated internally
and that manifests externally. In this sense, a person’s personal power grows as
they develop.

True power is a combination of both internal and external power. This means that
anyone can access a certain amount of power, regardless of their position in the
hierarchy.
  Dark side

One fundamental reason why the power is neglected is its negative interpretation.
The word "power" at the very outset is powerful enough to make our pulses beat
faster. Of course, for some people, it conjures up images of titanic struggles and
heroic battles all originating from the pursuit of acquiring and enjoying the elusive
goal of "power". In organizations, it is seen as seductive, potentially dangerous and
coercive force.

Power is viewed negatively as an evil and people are suspicious about a manager
who is a power-seeker. It is because many people consider power corrupts and
absolute power corrupts absolutely'. Power is emotionally a weighted term threat,
and coercion. Theory X, which says that power is bad; we must do away with it.
But there is another face of power. This is the one to be found in a Successful
manager.

Power had earned evil reputation in the past Power was Considered as "dirty" word
by many and some contend it is a dangerous element.

 Importance of power

In spite of all its negative meaning, power is vital and necessary part of
organizations. It is essential because it is like fuel that provides energy to run
organizational machinery. It is a necessity because managers without power are
merely figure heads and cannot effectively function to deliver goods.

Unlike in the past, there is a growing interest in power currently. We can attribute
this renewal of interest to change in organizational structure and the corresponding
change in philosophy of management. The modern organization structure is the
outcome of a contest for power between coalitions in the organizations. Failure to
understand power will dramatically educe the ability to understand organizational
behaviour.

 Power vs. influence

Powerful leaders have a great capacity to influence others. Their power is based on
a combination of their innate leadership qualities and the way others perceive them.
However, having power does not necessarily equate to having influence. The most
powerful leaders support and uplift their team members instead of dominating and
controlling them.

Also known as servant leaders, those who put the needs and development of their
employees first have the greatest influence.

 Power and leadership

The most powerful leaders have clarity and self-discipline. This allows them to
lead by example.

By modeling disciplined behaviors, they encourage and inspire their team members
to do the same. And when employees are self-disciplined, they require less micro-
management. This, in turn, increases the leader’s power, creating a virtuous cycle
of trust and self-leadership.

Insightfulness is another key aspect of a leader’s power. An insightful leader has

the capacity to see the bigger picture and communicate that vision. Their insights
give them greater power and influence over their team members.

The greater the impact a leader can have, the more they will be perceived as
powerful by their employees. Using your creativity to find solutions, make
decisions, and set organizational goals can increase your perceived power among
your employees.

Confident leaders also have more power and influence over their subordinates.
You can cultivate confidence by acting in line with your values and defending your
positions.

 Bases of power

1. Personal

2. Formal

Personal power contains reward power, legitimate power, coercive power where as
formal power contain expertise power and referent power.

1. Legitimate power
This is a type of formal power that you receive when you occupy a certain position
in your organization.

Depending on the position, it gives you authority within the company. It also lasts
as long as you remain in that role.

This type of power is recognized by subordinates. For this reason, it works well in
hierarchical organizations such as the military.

Legitimate power is obtained through demonstrating you have the skills required
for the role. Because this type of power is given, it can also be taken away.
Effective leaders don’t depend solely on legitimate power. Instead, they use it in
combination with others.

2. Reward power

Reward power means having the capacity to offer rewards or benefits in exchange
for carrying out a task or achieving a result.

Rewards usually come in the form of raises, benefits, promotions, or public praise.
However, this type of power is not always as effective as some leaders think.

It should be relevant and tangible enough to motivate your employees. It should

also be something that’s within your power to give and doesn’t depend on your
superiors.

This type of power may help achieve results, but it doesn’t necessarily ensure the
support or commitment of your employees.

3. Coercive power

Coercive power is one of the most commonly used in many workplaces, yet it is
also the least effective.

In fact, Liking advises leaders never to use coercive power. It involves using
threats to force people to do your will. They might not agree with what they have
to do, but they do it out of fear of repercussions such as losing their jobs.
For example, in many companies, leaders demand constant innovation and new
ideas from their employees. Those who don’t measure up face being replaced by
someone else.

Although it may work in the short-term, coercive power creates unhappy,

disengaged employees and is best avoided. It can also negatively affect employee
retention efforts.

4. Expert power

Expert power comes from having both deep technical knowledge and extensive
experience in your field of expertise.

When you’re the expert in your field, people in your company naturally come to
you to benefit from your knowledge. Your expertise gives you credibility, and
people trust and respect your opinions.

Expert power gives you the ability to influence co-workers across all levels of the
organization. This enables you to steer the growth and development of both
individual colleagues and the company as a whole.

However, a true expert knows they must continue developing their knowledge and
skills to maintain credibility.

5. Referent power

According to Nicole Lipkin, author of “What Keeps Leaders Up At Night,” this is

the type of power that gives a leader the greatest influence.

Leaders get referent power through qualities that inspire trust and respect in their
colleagues. These include honesty and integrity.

A person who holds referent power has excellent interpersonal skills and exudes
confidence. This makes them natural leaders. They listen to their colleagues and
offer help and support. This type of power is internal rather than external. It is a
personal power that cannot be handed to you by someone else. As your referent
power grows, so too will your capacity to influence your colleagues.
  How to use the 5 types of power

It’s important to understand each type of power before looking to apply it. Once
you have a good grasp of each one, you can consider ways to apply them at work.

Understand your goals: It’s much easier to create a plan when you know what the
end goal is. The same can be said for leadership styles and types of power. Before
delegating or motivating your team, understand what you want to achieve in doing
so.

Understand your team: It’s also important to know who you are speaking to and
what they value. You can get to know your team better with async check-ins, 1:1
meetings, casual coffee chats, or more structured employee engagement surveys.
By familiarizing yourself with your team, you will have a better idea of which
power types to use and when.

Consider your leadership style: Are you a democratic leader who likes to hear from
each individual before making a decision? Or do you take a more top-down
approach? Different leadership styles feed into and support various types of power,
so try to think of them as a cohesive partnership for great leadership.

Reflect and revise your approach: You might have great success the first time you
apply a new type of power. But if it falls flat and does not resonate with your team
(or your own values), then try another approach. Remaining flexible and being
open to feedback will make the process easier.
  Power tactics

Rational persuasion. A tactic that is used to try and convince someone with a
valid reason, rational logic, or realistic facts.

Inspirational appeals. A tactic that builds enthusiasm by appealing to emotions,

ideas and/or values.

Consultation. A tactic that focuses on getting others to participate in the planning

process, making decisions, and encourage changes.

Personal appeals. A tactic that refers to friendship and loyalty while making a
request.

Exchange. A tactic that suggests that making express or implied promises and
trading favours.

Pressure. A tactic that focuses on demanding compliance or using intimidation or

threats.

Legitimating tactics. This tactic suggests that basing a request on one’s authority
or right, organizational rules or policies, or express or implied support from
superiors, is a best.

 Power dynamic

1. Distribution of Power:

The amount of power in an organisation as well as in single interpersonal situation

is variable and the amount of power changes over periods of time.

About power distribution in an organisation the following observations can be

made:

a. The higher the level of a person, the greater is the amount of his power. This
matter is however, not so simple, because of the presence of the multiple bases of
power. Often the power yielded by one member may be disproportionate to the
organisational position he holds.

b. Those in power try to grab more of it. They strongly resist any attempt to
weaken the power they yield.
c. At any point of time, the amount of power in an organisation is fixed-a zero sum
game. If one person or group gains in power, another loses. Power pacts are carried
out within a fixed amount of framework and it is the framework that changes over
time.

2. Dependency:

A person or a group cannot have power in isolation. Each party to the power
relationship is in a position to some degree to be able to control or influence
other’s conduct. Dependency of some kind is the basic characteristic of all the
modern organisations. In mutual dependency, the power of a person over another
depends on the amount of resistance the other person can put against the influence
attempts by the person.

Thus, power is balanced, if both have equal power and dependency upon each
other, the relationship is imbalanced when either of them has more power or
dependency than the other.

The dependency part of dynamics can be described as follows:

a. Power largely depends upon dependency relationship. The greater person A

depends on B, the greater power of B on A.

b. The greater the dependence of an organisation on a limited numbers of

individuals the greater the power these individuals enjoy.

c. A person who cannot be easily displaced enjoys more power than others whose
services can be easily replaced.

3. Uncertainty:

The uncertainty element of dynamics can be explained on the following lines:

a. Organisations seek to avoid uncertainty as far as possible. People who can

absorb uncertainty yield more power.

b. The more the contingencies controlled by a unit, more is the power exercised by
it.
c. Criticality of tasks depends upon the degree of coping with uncertainties, non-
substitutability and pervasiveness. Higher the degree of these factors in task, more
critical it is.

4. Compliance:

Compliance element of dynamics of power can be discussed on the following lines:

a. People, generally, comply with legitimate power as compared to all other types
of power.

b. Reward and coercive powers are generally used by managers as tools for
compliance.

Politics
 Meaning of Organizational Politics:

Organizational politics are informal, unofficial, and sometimes behind efforts to

sell ideas, influence an organization, increase power, or achieve other targeted
objectives. Political behavior in organizations involves many activities such as
spreading rumors, leaking confidant information, favoring others in the
organization for mutual benefit. Organizational Politics is self-serving behavior not
approved by the organization.

It is also known as office politics and organizational politics. It involves the use of
power and social networking within a workplace to achieve changes that benefit
the organization or individuals within it.

The positive side of organizational politics is characterized by their analysis of the

situation in terms of personal and organizational goals, open problem solving, and
victory.

The downside of organizational politics is characterized by observing the situation

in a win-win situation, keeping hidden agendas, advancing self-interest.

When people play politics, it causes controversy, conflict, tension, anxiety and
uncertainty in the organization.

 Organizational politics has the following feature: –

 a. It’s purpose is personal gain arising from the use of power and not
organizational gain.

b. It is a deliberate attempt to use politics as a source to broaden its power base.

c. It is not part of a person’s job requirement. It is used to benefit a person.

d. It may be legitimate or illegal mate political behavior.

 consequences of organizational politics

Although political behavior has positive consequences for those involved in moral
politics, those who do not have political skills do not face positive results.

The negative consequences of organizational politics are as follows: –

Low job satisfaction: – Although personal benefits are achieved, people who do
not receive promotions or awards based on their completeness on the job may have
lower job satisfaction. Those who want to achieve goals on the basis of merit, but
politics are not satisfied with their jobs if they have to adopt political behavior as
an inevitable course of action.

High tension: – If a person does not engage in political behavior on the basis of
morality and ethics, he loses his chances of promotion, as others are overtaken by
political behaviour, it increases his job stress.

Organizational Conflict: – Organizational conflict is a disagreement between two

or more organization members or groups arising from the fact that they must share
scarce resources or work activities and / or the fact that they have different
conditions, goals, values and perceptions. It negatively affects productivity.

Goal Displacement: – Organizational politics broadens the power base of some

people who use it to promote personal goals rather than organizational goals. This
leads to target displacement.

Low Performance: – The political environment reduces people’s motivation to

work which negatively affects their job performance.
High Absenteeism and Turnover: – When low work performance, low job
satisfaction, employees struggle to handle and job stress become too much,
absenteeism of workers from the workplace will increase. Employee turnover
refers to the number or percentage of workers who leave an organization and are
replaced by new employees..

 Factors relating to political behaviour

(1) Individual factors - Individual politicking is a function of a person's

personality traits, his background and experiences, and the environment in which
he operates. According to researchers, three aspects of individual personality
influence political behavior: the level of self-monitoring, the individual's locus of
control, and the strength of the individual's power motive.

People who are high self-monitors have good social skills and behaviors and are
likely to be more skilled at politicking. This is because they are quickly in
observing and learning social cues and conforming to social behavior. People who
have an internal locus of control are also more skilled at controlling the people
around them and their environment. They have a proactive attitude and believe in
their ability to control situations. People who have a high power motive also try to
acquire and use power to their benefit.

In addition to personality, factors related to the person's work environment affect

his political behavior. For instance, when a person has invested a lot in the
organization in terms of future expectations, he is unlikely to engage in extreme
political behavior that would put in danger his interests. Political behavior also
depends on the alternatives perceived and available to the individual. If a person
perceives a large number of alternatives, lie is more likely to risk give way to in
extreme or illegal political behavior to further his interests. The more a person
perceives that he is likely to achieve success through the use of illegal means, the
more he is likely to use them. Therefore, top level employees, who have special
skills and considerable experience, are more open to politicking than lower level,
inexperienced employees.

(2) Organizational factors- Research have proved that organizational factors have
a greater influence on politicking in organizations than individual factors. It has
been proved that political behavior grows when organizations exhibit certain
characteristics. Some of these characteristics are described below.

(i) rare resources- When an organization faces a inefficiency of resources, the

employees are more likely to engage in politicking. They do so to prevent the loss
of resources or to obtain more resources for themselves in the face of competition.

(ii) Ambiguity of goals- When an organization does not have clear goals, it
provides more opportunity to employees to engage in politics in an attempt to turn
outcomes in their favor. Political behavior is also at a high when a non
programmed decision has to be taken, as non programmed decisions also provide a
lot of scope to turn outcomes in one's favor.

(iii) Role ambiguity- Like goal ambiguity, role ambiguity also encourages
political behavior. When roles are not clear, employees are not aware of the limits
to their behavior in the organization. This encourages them to engage in more
political activity.

(iv) Performance appraisals and rewards- Studies have shown dial employees
tend to engage in more politicking when organizations are likely to conduct
performance appraisals or take decisions regarding promotions. Through
politicking, people try to influence outcomes in their favor.

(v)Culture of the organization- The culture organization also determines the level
of political activity. When the culture emphasizes a win-lose approach to the
allocation of rewards (where one party's gain is another party's loss), more
politicking is likely to occur to influence the decision in one party's favor.

(vi) Lack of mutual trust- When the culture is characterized by a lack of mutual
trust and high level of competition, people are likely to do more politicking to
protect their own interests and put down competition. When there is a lack of trust
political behaviour in the organization is likely to be of the illigal kind.

(vii) Involvement of top management- When lower level employees notice that
the top management engages in political activity and is rewarded for it, they are
more likely to become involved in such activities themselves.

 Politics tactics
(1) Making the supervisor look good- Traditionally referred to as "apple
polishing," this political strategy is prompted by a desire to favourably influence
those who control one's career ascent. Anyone with an oversized ego is an easy
target for this tactic.

(2) Embrace or demolish - Sometimes it becomes necessary to make decisions

and take actions that are unpopular such as demoting or transferring some one.
Such a person who is demoted or transferred against his will, is likely to become
your political enemy. It may be politically advantageous move to have this person
fired so that he will not be there to take revenge at a later date. This is specially
significant during corporate takeovers. According to Anthony Jay; "The guiding
principle is that senior men in taken-over firms should either be warmly welcomed
and encouraged or sacked; because if they are sacked they are powerless, whereas
if they are simply downgraded they will remain united and resentful and
determined to get their own power back,"

(3) Divide and rule- If effective, this is the most successful and powerful tactic to
retain political power. Historians have recorded the fact that the British ruled India
by pursuing the policy of dividing the Indians on the basis of caste and religion and
thus ruling India for a long time. The assumption underlying this strategy being
that those who are divided will not form alliance themselves thus making them
weak in any confrontations. By encouraging argue among possible rivals, it is
possible to keep them continuously off balance so that they will never get together
to mount a successful attack against you. However, it is a risky technique in that
should the rivals become aware of your such devious schemes they can get
together for the sole purpose of unseating you from your power base.

(4) Exclude the opposition- Another technique of getting your own way is to
make sure that any opposition is absent at important meetings where such
oppositions block your desired outcomes. This could be done by holding such
meetings at a time when rivals are away either on business trips or on vacation.
With the opposition absent, it is possible to influence the decision making process
in your favour.
  negative aspects of politics

The distribution, allocation and maintenance of power, in the organization are

determined by politics. Politics decides who gets what, when and how. But politics
has certain dysfunctional

aspects also on the working of the organization which are described below:

(1) Self Interest- Political behaviour is, generally, motivated and guided by self
interests. If there is conflict between self interests and organizational goals, and
self interest obstructs the organizational goals, politics is said to have negative
effects. For example, if the personnel manager, manipulates the selection process,
to point somebody who is not competent enough, the impact on the organization
will be dysfunctional. But if an individual behaves in a way that is compatible with
the organizational goals, to promote his self interest, such behaviour is functional.

(2) Dysfunctional Aspects of Power Politics on Employees- Power politics may

weaken morale, demotivate the employees, victims and victors may be created and
energy and time may be wasted away on planning, attacks and counter attacks
instead of concentrating on task accomplishments.

(3) Organizational Conflicts- Organizational politics may generate organizational

conflicts due to which organizational time, efforts and energy may be wasted. This
will affect the organizational effectiveness adversely.

(4) Effect on Managers- Research proves that those managers who engage in
more political activity are relatively more successful in terms of promotions but
also relatively less effective in terms of subordinate satisfaction and commitment
and the performance of their unit.

(5) Inequitable Distribution of Power- Some individuals may be able to acquire a

major portion of the organisational power, because of organizational politics. This
power May be used to promote self interest, exploit other people and displaced
organizational goals.

 Negotiation

Negotiation is a method by which people settle differences. It is a process by which

compromise or agreement is reached while avoiding argument and dispute.
In any disagreement, individuals understandably aim to achieve the best possible
outcome for their position (or perhaps an organisation they represent). However,
the principles of fairness, seeking mutual benefit and maintaining a relationship are
the keys to a successful outcome.

Negotiation: Majority of companies have to negotiate in many areas of

organizational conflict. Negotiation is an open process for two parties to find a
satisfactory solution to a complex conflict. Negotiation is process in which two or
more parties exchange goods or services and attempt to agree on the exchange rate
for them. In an organizational context, negotiations may take place between two
people, within a group, between groups and over the Internet. Negotiation can take
extensive forms from skilled negotiator acting on behalf of a particular
organization or position in a formal setting to an informal negotiation between
friends. Negotiation can be contrasted with intervention, where a neutral third party
listens to each side's arguments and attempts to help craft an agreement between
the parties. It can also be compared with arbitration, which resembles a legal
proceeding. In arbitration, both sides make an argument as to the merits of their
case and the arbitrator decides the outcome. This negotiation is also called
positional or hard-bargaining negotiation. Basically, negotiation is a problem-
solving procedure in which two or more people willingly discuss their differences
and try to reach a joint decision on their common concerns. Negotiation requires
participants to recognize issues, about which they differ, educate each other about
their needs and interests, generate possible settlement options and bargain over the
terms of the final agreement. Winning negotiations result in some kind of exchange
or promise being made by the negotiators to each other. The exchange may be
tangible or intangible.

 Negotiations are categorized by four elements:

a. Some disagreement or conflict exists, which may be perceived, felt or

manifest.

b. There is some degree of interdependence between the parties.

c. The situation must be conducive to opportunistic interaction. Each party

must have both the means and in the inclination to attempt to influence the
other.
 d. There exists some possibility of agreement, without which the negotiation
cannot bring about a positive resolution.

 Negotiation style

Negotiation Style: Compete

A competitive negotiation style follows the model of “I win, you lose.”

Competitive negotiators tend to do whatever it takes to reach their desired
agreement – even when it comes at the expense of another person or entity. They
are results-oriented and focused on achieving short-term goals quickly. Their
desire for success motivates them, though the process of negotiation can blind
them to potentially harmful impacts. Competitive negotiators use all tools possible
to boost their negotiation success, including:

a. Their position within a company structure

b. Their personality and humor

c. Aggression

d. Their economic prowess

e. Their company’s strength and size

f. Their brand’s visibility and influence

A competitive negotiation style is beneficial when you need to reach a short-term

agreement quickly. If the terms of an agreement are critical and must be complied
with, a competitive negotiator will be your secret weapon. If the second negotiator
is also competitive, having another competitive negotiator on your team will be
able to counter-balance their aggression.

Competitive negotiators work best in a highly competitive industry or for once-off

sales, such as selling a home or a car. However, for negotiations with another
highly competitive body, it is best to blend negotiation styles to avoid gridlock
between two competitive negotiators.

These types of negotiators may focus more on winning than reaching a mutually
beneficial agreement with the other party. Business relationships might break, and
a company’s reputation may tarnish if a negotiation style is too competitive and
crosses the line into bullying.

If you are a competitive negotiator, make sure to blend your style with a bit of
accommodation or collaboration. Invite a partner to balance out your natural
competitive streak. Business is as much about building strong relationships as it is
about closing deals!

Negotiation Style: Collaborate

In contrast, a collaborative negotiation style follows the “I win, you win” model.
Collaborative negotiators focus on making sure all parties have their needs met in
an agreement. They value strengthening, establishing, and building relationships
without compromising their company’s best interests.

Collaborative negotiators often evolve into this negotiation style from another. As
time goes on and a negotiator gains confidence in reaching agreements, they
become more comfortable advocating for their needs. They also become skilled in
finding a mutually beneficial balance between their needs and the other party’s.

Individuals with a collaborative negotiation style are willing to invest time in

finding innovative solutions and building business partnerships with other
organizations. Other negotiation styles are often too impatient to invest this time,
but collaborative negotiators are confident that they will benefit in the end.

A collaborative negotiation style is effective in most business negotiations.

Collaborating with competitive negotiators is something to be wary of, however;
since this negotiation style focuses on winning the most for their company, they
might not be interested in developing a collaborative relationship. As a result, the
more collaborative company can lose out – so be careful and always keep track of
the agreement’s value.

Negotiation Style: Compromise

Many students of negotiation styles confuse the collaborative style with the
compromising one. Unlike the “win-win” collaborative style, the compromising
negotiation style follows a “I win/lose some, you win/lose some” model. When
reaching the terms of the agreement, compromisers often relinquish some terms in
favor of gaining others.

For example, if two governments are trying to reach a trade agreement, a

compromiser might give the other government greater access to their country’s
dairy market to gain protections for digital media trade. Simply put, a
compromising negotiation style is a form of bargaining. Compromisers split the
agreement’s value between the two parties versus finding a solution so that
everyone benefits from an agreement’s full value. A competitive negotiator can
easily take advantage of a compromising negotiator.

A compromising negotiation style is most useful in situations where the opposite

party is trustworthy, and the agreement is under a tight deadline. However,
compromising will cause your company to lose out on collaborative partnerships
and innovative solutions.

Negotiation Style: Avoid

An avoiding negotiation style follows a “I lose, you lose” model. People who
identify with the avoiding negotiation style highly dislike conflict and tend to talk
in vague terms about the issue at hand rather than the issue itself. If an agreement
is reached and an avoiding negotiator dislikes the outcome, they may try to take
revenge on the opposite party before the party even knows that they were unhappy
with the agreement.

Since avoiders dislike conflict and struggle with direct communication, they come
off as passive-aggressive. This can cause rifts in interpersonal business
relationships. Avoidance is a typical reaction when a negotiator is pitted against
someone who is highly competitive. Avoiding negotiation styles work best in
situations where the negotiation concerns a matter that is trivial to both parties. In
conflict resolution, avoiding negotiators work best in situations where the
investment of time to resolve the issue outweighs the outcome of the discussion.

Negotiation Style: Accommodate

An accommodating negotiating style follows the “I lose, you win” model – which
does not seem to be in a negotiator’s best interest. Accommodating negotiators are
the direct opposite of competitive negotiators. They focus on preserving
relationships and building a friendly rapport by sacrificing some of their
company’s interests in favor of the opposite party’s interests.

Accommodators tend to try to win people over by giving in to their requests. They
tend to share more information than they should. They are often well-liked by their
colleagues because of their kindness – but kindness doesn’t work in every
negotiation situation. Accommodating negotiation styles work best in situations
where your company has caused harm to another and needs to repair a significant
relationship. These negotiators are skilled at peacemaking between different bodies.

However, don’t send a pure accommodator alone to a negotiation with a

competitive body. They can easily be taken advantage of. An accommodating style
can easily turn into a collaborative style with proper training and teamwork.

Stress
Like motivation, stress is a very individual experience. One person can feel
extreme pressure and anxiety over a task that is looming, and another might look at
the same task and see it as an exciting challenge. In spite of that, we’ve seen an
overall jump in the number of people that report stress on the job, and we can see
how it’s taking its toll.

Stress is a dynamic condition, and it exists when an individual is confronted with

an opportunity, constraint or demand related to what he or she desires, and for
which the outcome is perceived to be both uncertain and important.
Stress isn’t necessarily bad, even though it’s usually discussed in a negative
context. There’s opportunity in stress, and that’s a good thing because it offers
potential gain. For instance, consider Luke Skywalker, piloting his X-Wing fighter,
trying to blast his torpedo into that small, little space that was the Death Star’s only
weakness. There was plenty of stress, provided by stormtroopers and Darth Vader
himself via bullets and explosions, but Luke concentrated, used stress to his
advantage, and shot that torpedo right into the exhaust port.

Okay, maybe it was the Force, too. Athletes and performers use stress positively in
“clutch” situations, using it to push themselves to their performance maximums.
Even ordinary workers in an organization will use an increased workload and
responsibilities as a challenge that increases the quality and quantity of their
outputs.

Photograph of a person sitting on the ground covering their face with their hands.
They are leaning against a couch.Stress is negative when it’s associated with
constraints and demands. Constraints are forces that prevent a person from doing
what he or she wants. Demands represent the loss of something desired. They’re
the two conditions that are necessary for potential stress to become actual stress.
Again, there must be uncertainty over the outcome and the outcome must be
important.

Stress is highest for those who don’t know if they will win or lose and lowest for
those that feel that winning (or losing) is an inevitability. Even so, the individual
can perceive the winning (or losing) as an inevitability, but if it’s important, the
individual is still likely to experience a level of stress.

The symptoms of stress for a person are as individual as the conditions that cause it.
Typically, when presented with stress, the body responds with a surge of hormones
and chemicals that results in a fight-or-flight response. As the name would indicate,
this response allows you to either fight the stressor or run away from it.

The general adaptation syndrome (GAS) describes the three stages that individuals
experience when they encounter stressors, respond and try to adapt:

Alarm. The physical reaction one experiences when a stressor first presents itself.
This could include an elevation of blood pressure, dilated pupils, tensing muscles.
Resistance. If the stressor continues to be present, the person fights the threat by
preparing to resist, physiologically and psychologically. At first, the stressor will
be met with plenty of energy, but if the stressor persists, the individual will start to
experience fatigue in fighting it and resistance will wear down.

Exhaustion. Continuous, unsuccessful resistance eventually leads to the collapse of

physical and mental defenses.

When stress is chronically present, it begins to do damage to a person’s body and

his mental state. High blood pressure, higher risk of heart attack and stroke are just
some of the physical ramifications. Anxiety and depression are the hallmarks of
psychological symptoms of stress, but can also include cognitive symptoms like
forgetfulness and indecisiveness. Behaviorally, a person suffering from stress may
be prone to sudden verbal outbursts, hostility, drug and alcohol abuse and even
violence.

Another result of chronic stress and overwork is burnout. The term “burnout” is
tossed out by people quite a bit to describe the symptoms of their stress response,
but burnout is an authentic condition marked by feelings of exhaustion and
powerlessness, leading to apathy, cynicism and complete withdrawal. Burnout is a
common condition among those who have chosen careers that serve others or
interact heavily with other people—healthcare and teaching among them.

Stress is a significant issue for businesses. Now that we know what it is and what it
looks like, let’s take a look at the most common causes.

 Sources of Stress

If you poll a group of individuals about what their biggest stressors are, they’re
likely to give you these four answers:

Money

Work

Family responsibilities

Health concerns
In most surveys on stress and its causes, these four responses have been at the top
of the list for quite a long time, and I’m sure you weren’t surprised to read them.
But managers should take pause when they realize that all four of these are either
directly or indirectly impacted by the workplace.

Still, there are so many differences among individuals and their stressors. Why is
one person’s mind-crippling stress another person’s biggest motivation and
challenge? We’re going to attempt to answer this by looking at the three sources of
stress—individual, organizational, and environmental—and then add in the
concept of human perception in an attempt to understand this conundrum.

 Individual Factors

The first of three sources of stress are individual. Individuals may experience
stressful commutes to work, or a stressful couple of weeks helping at a work event,
but those kinds of temporary, individual stresses are not what we’re looking at here.
We’re looking for a deeper, longer-term stress. Family stress—marriages that are
ending, issues with children, an ailing parent—these are stressful situations that an
employee really can’t leave at home when he or she comes to work. Financial
stress, like the inability to pay bills or an unexpected new demand on a person’s
cash flow might also be an issue that disturbs an employee’s time at work. Finally,
an individual’s own personality might actually contribute to his or her stress.
People’s dispositions—how they perceive things as negative or positive—can be a
factor in each person’s stress as well.

 Organizational Factors

There’s a plethora of organizational sources of stress.

Task or role demands: these are factors related to a person’s role at work, including
the design of a person’s job or working conditions. A stressful task demand might
be a detailed, weekly presentation to the company’s senior team. A stressful role
demand might be where a person is expected to achieve more in a set amount of
time than is possible.

Interpersonal demands: these are stressors created by co-workers. Perhaps an

employee is experiencing ongoing conflict with a co-worker he or she is expected
to collaborate closely with. Or maybe employees are experiencing a lack of social
support in their roles.

Organizational structure: this refers to the level of differentiation within an

organization, the degree of rules and regulations, and where decisions are made. If
employees are unable to participate in decisions that affect them, they may
experience stress.

Organizational leadership: this refers to the organization’s style of leadership,

particularly the managerial style of its senior executives. Leaders can create an
environment of tension, fear and anxiety and can exert unrealistic pressure and
control. If employees are afraid they’ll be fired for not living up to leadership’s
standards, this can definitely be a source of stress.

Organizational life stage: an organization goes through a cycle of stages (birth,

growth, maturity, decline). For employees, the birth and decline of an organization
can be particularly stressful, as those stages tend to be filled with heavy workloads
and a level of uncertainty about the future.
  Environmental Factors

Finally, there are environmental sources of stress. The economy may be in a

downturn, creating uncertainty for job futures and bank accounts. There may be
political unrest or change creating stress. Finally, technology can cause stress, as
new developments are constantly making employee skills obsolete, and workers
fear they’ll be replaced by a machine that can do the same. Employee are also
often expected to stay connected to the workplace 24/7 because technology allows
it.

it’s important to understand that these stressors are additive. In other words, stress
builds up, and new elements add to a person’s stress level. So a single element of
stress might not seem important in itself, but when added to other stresses the
worker is experiencing, it can, as the old adage says, be the straw that broke the
camel’s back.

Individual Differences

icon of several people standing in a circle. One person is highlighted in orange.

Those are the sources of stress, but differences within an individual determine
whether that stress will be positive or negative. Those individual differences
include Perception. This is what moderates the individual’s relationship to the
stressor. For instance, one person might see a potential layoff as a stressful
situation, while another person might see that same layoff as an opportunity for a
nice severance package and the opportunity to start a new business.

Job Experience. Because stress is associated with turnover, it would stand to

reason that those employees with a long tenure are the most stress-resistant of the
bunch.

Social Support. Co-workers, especially those who are caring or considered to be

friends, can help protect a fellow employee against the effects of stress.

Belief in the locus of control. Those who have a high internal locus of control
(those that believe they are in control of their own fate) are, unsurprisingly, not as
affected by stress as those who feel they are not in control.
Self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is an individual’s belief that he or she can complete a
task. Research shows that employees who have strong levels of self-efficacy are
more resistant to the effects of stress.

Hostility. Some employees carry around a high level of hostility as a part of their
personalities, and they’re often suspicious and distrustful of their co-workers.
These personality traits make a person more susceptible to stress.

 Consequences and Costs of Stress

1. Physiological Symptoms

2. Psychological Symptoms

3. Behavioral Symptoms

a. Physiological Symptoms

These state the effects of stress on the health of an individual. Such effects can be
high blood pressure, exhaustion, muscle cramps, stomach problems, change in
appetite, weakness, headache and back pain.

b. Psychological Symptoms

These signify the effects of stress on the mental and emotional condition of an
individual. Examples of psychological symptoms are nervousness, irritability,
tension, anger, depression, difficulty in making decisions and anxiety.

c. Behavioural Symptoms

These indicate the effects of stress on the behaviour of an individual. Behavioural

symptoms include a change in productivity, an increase in absenteeism and
employee turnover, rapid speech, and sleep disorders.

Organizational change
The term 'organizational changes' implies the creation of imbalances in the existing
pattern of situation. When a business organization operates and functions for a
longtime an adjustment between its technical, human and structural setup is
established. Organization tends to approximate equilibrium in relation to their
environment. In other words, people (number) evolve a tentative set of relations
with their environment. They have an adjustment with their job, working
conditions, friends and colleagues etc., change requires individuals to make new
adjustments. Hence the fear of adjustment gives rise to the problem of change and
resistance to change.

Change could be both reactive and proactive. A proactive change has necessarily to
be planned to attempt to prepare for anticipated future challenges. A reactive
change may be an automatic response or a planned response to change taking
place in the environment.

 Definitions of organizational change

The concept of organizational change have been defined as:

(i) The term organizational change refers to any alteration which occurs in the
overall work environment of an organization.

(ii) Organizational change as a process is simply modification of the structure or

process of a system. It may be good or bad, the concept is descriptive only.

(iii) When organizational system is disturbed by some internal or external force,

change frequently occurs.

 Organisational change process

Some organization have developed Organizational Planning Department with an

object to carry out systematic formalized procedure for introducing organizational
change. Whenever any type of organizational change have to brought it has
normally many stages.

The model for planned change was developed by Kurt Lewin. He was of the
opinion that in the change process driving force or forces for change move in one
way and restraining force or forces for maintaining status-quo move in another
way and where these two forces reconcile that emerges as performance.

According to Warren Bennis, "Planned change encompasses the application of

systematic and appropriate knowledge to human affairs for the purpose of creating
intelligent action and choices."
Kurt Lewin has described the following stages in the process of planned change:

(i) Unfreezing : Unfreezing aspect in the

planned change creates awareness among the individuals and organization about
the change and prepare them for it. The manager, acting as a change agent has
ensure to break upon the shell of complacency among his subordinates.
Subordinates may resist change for economic, social or personal reasons. But it is
possible to unfreeze the situation through series of discussions with the sub-
ordinates. The manager must clear all the doubts fears of the subordinates about
the proposed change. It is first but the most important aspect of proposed change.

(ii) Moving or changing to new situations: If it is seen that the members of the
organization have identified the need for change and they are prepared to accept it
there is a need to redefine their behaviour patterns. They should be given intensive
training as to the behavioural changes necessary for successful introduction of the
proposed change so that adoption of the new environment takes shape as desired.
Several problems may come up during the process of implementation some of
which may be totally unexpected. It must be handled with due patience and
participation.

(iii) Refreezing the situation: Refreezing phase occurs when the new behaviour
becomes normal way of life. In order to make new behaviour permanent one, it
must be continuously reinforced so that newly acquired behaviour does not
diminish.

The new roles, relationship and behavioural pattern should be allowed to be

combined and becoming one's habits. The subordinates should get a real feeling
that benefits generated by changes are worthwhile and basically for their own
benefit.

 Forces for change

1. External forces

Organizations are forced most frequently to introduce changes in relation to

environmental pressures. Modern manager is change-con-scious and operating in
the constantly changing environment. Many external changes bombard the modern
organizations and make change inevitable. Some of these common forces are:

(i) Government Rules and Regulations: From time to time government brings
changes in their policies, rules and regulations which necessitate change in the
organization e.g the government policy to privatize the power sector encouraged
many big corporate houses to diversify into power sector and changes in Direct and
Indirect Tax regulations compelled people to change their mode of investments,

(ii) Technological advances: It is the major external force which calls for the
change. It has become indispensable requirement of the time. The adoption of new
technology such as computer, telecommunication system and flexible
manufacturing operations have affected the working of all the organization. Due to
this jobs will have to be reshaped. Individuals who do routine, specialized and
narrow-jobs will be replaced by workers who can perform multiple taste active
participate in decision making.

(iii) Changes in people requirements: In these days being buyer's market, customer
does not want to purchase what is given to him, rather he goes to purchase what he
desires to purchase. So the sellers have to produce and provide products and
services to customer exactly as per their requirements. In service industry e.g Five
Star Hotel have started providing new services such as Business Center,
Conference Hall facilities, Secretarial Services etc.
(iv) Marketing Competition: At present marketing conditions are no more static.
They are in the process of rapid change as per the needs, desires and expectations
of the customers are changing. Markets are flooded with new products and
innovations takes place everyday. New media of advertisement and publicity are
being used for influencing the customers. All these factors in fact, are putting
greater pressure on the organization to change their technologies and marketings
strategies.

2. Internal Forces

Forces for change which occur within the organization can be traced to changes in
managerial personnel, some inherent deficiencies in the organizational system,
certain other forces.

(i) Changes in the Managerial Personnel: Knowledge explosion brought

obsolescence in the earlier jobs and calls for dynamism in the managerial
personnel. These changes encompass the retirement of the old, transfer and
promotion of managers and the replacement of old and static managers by a more
versatile, dynamic and young lots. Changes also include increasing training of the
existing personnel so as to make them fit to function in their respective places
effectively. With change each manager generally brings his own ideas and the way
of working in the organization. Doubtlessly, employees are changing, bringing
higher educational faculties, placing greater emphasis on human values and
questioning authority. The changing personnel certainly act as an important
pressure that cannot be neglected or underestimated.

(ii) Certain Deficiencies in the Existing System : Another associated Internal force
that is instrumental to organizational change is the existence of certain loopholes in
the system itself. They may be like unmanageable spans of control, lack of
coordination between the departments, obstacles in communication, multiplicity of
meaningless of committees, lack of uniformity in the policies, non-cooperation
between line and staff etc.
Resistance to change
 Reasons for resistance to change

Change is a continuous and natural process. It is a necessary thing for the survival
and growth of business enterprises. For enterprises success it may be necessary to
forecast change in order to take advantages of the opportunities offered. Yet, since
people resist to change, it must be an objective for the management to study the
sources and causes of resistance to change, to overcome the resistance, to build in
his organization an awareness of change and to develop an ability in itself to
forecast it and also to form an attitude of welcome change.

 Reasons for people resistance to change

The basic problem in the management of change is the study of causes of

resistance to change. Despite the fact that change is a persistent phenomenon, it is
a common experience that men resist change whether in the context of their pattern
of life or in the context of their situations in the organization. Change of any type
requires a readjustment while it is not simple; possible and favorable to all. Hence,
resistance to change is also very usual as the change itself. To quote "Man is
always feared the unknown and a change represents the unknown." Some of the
important reasons why people resist change in organizations are classified in two
broad categories they are as follows:

(i) Individual source of resistance.

(ii) organizational resistance.

Individual factor

The needs, perceptions and personalities of people form the basis for individual
resistance to change. Individuals may resist change because ofthe following
reasons:

(1) Selective Information Processing- Individuals form their own perceptions about
people and the world around them and like to stick to these perceptions. They do
not like to receive any information that contradicts their perceptions. Therefore,
individuals process information selectively to make it compatible with their
perceptions. They hear only the information that they want to and ignore the rest
that contradicts their perceptual world. For example, employees may listen to their
colleagues who tell them about the negative consequences of automation but
ignore what managers say about the benefits of Computerization. This means,
employees perceive that automation is a threat to their jobs and therefore accept
only the information that supports their perception.

(2) Fear of the unknown -People associate change with uncertainty. They fear the
unknown and the insecurity resulting from it. They are anxious about their ability
to adapt to the requirement of a new system. For example, when computers
replaced manual systems, many people developed a negative attitude towards
computers for the fear of not being able to acquire the necessary computer skills.

(3) Economic factors- Employees would resist change if it is likely to decrease

their income or sources of earnings. For example, if an organization undertakes
restructuring and job redesigning, workers (who are paid piece-rate wages) may
resist it out of Tear that it will decrease their productivity and affect their
remuneration.

(4) Security- People are generally concerned about their security and resist any
change that threatens their safety and security. For instance, when a company
introduces new sophisticated machinery or equipment that are likely to replace
manual labor, its employees will feel insecured about their jobs and resist the
company's automation efforts.

(5) Habit -Human beings tend to develop habits. A person may need to make
several decisions every day. Instead of considering all the possible alternatives for
each decision, he depends on habits for most of his responses. These habit- based
responses are also called programmed responses. When change is implemented, it
may require employees to forgo or change some of their habits. This is often met
with resistance because changing one's habits is a painful task. For example, an
employee may be habituated to busy life style in the city. It is very natural for him
to resist, if he is transferred to a branch located in some rural area.

(6) Social factors-People also resist change when they anticipate that the change
might affect their status in the society adversely, In the context of organization,
when some jobs are redesigned, the affected employees may develop a sense of
insecurity regarding their position in the organization and consequently resist the
effort.

 Organisation resistance

In addition to individual resistance, there is organization resistance too.

Organization resistance can best seen in public sector undertakings in India. The
current development may call for a change in their services, yet they prefer to
retain their structure and traditional practices. Employees strongly resist if any
attempt is made to bring about a change in such organizations. Therefore, change
agents need a great deal of patience and perseverance to initiate change in these
organizations. Not only commercial organizations, even educational institutions,
whose purpose is to encourage people to learn new filings and challenge
established practices, resist change. In most of the institutions, the framework of
syllabus and teaching methods remain the same for many years.

Some of the significant sources of organization resistance are discussed below:

(1) Structural inertia -Organizations always attempt to maintain a steady and

balanced stale that is conducive to employees. They have inbuilt mechanism to
achieve that state of equilibrium. For example, if a good number of employees and
managers leave the company for various reasons, the work load on the remaining
employees and managers will increase. There will be chaos and confusion among
employees due to lack of direction and disturbance in the slate of balance in the
department. To fill the vacancies, the human resources department initiates a
recruitment process and selects new employees. But the new and old employees
may find it difficult to work together because of differences in their cultural
backgrounds and work behavior.

Training and oilier socialization techniques are used to administer the required job
skills and shape the behavior of the new incumbents in the desired way. In this way,
the organization gains back its stability. But, when a change program is initiated in
the organization, the structural inertia created by these inbuilt mechanisms offer
strong resistance.

(2) Limited focus of change-An organization consists of many sub-systems that are
interrelated and interdependent. Due to the interdependency of subsystems. change
in one subsystem will affect other systems as well. Therefore, one cannot introduce
change in a subsystem without considering its impact on the rest of the system.

(3) Group inertia -Sometimes, group norms may prevent an individual from
adopting change. For example, an individual employee may favor a proposal of
change from the management, he may not accept it until the union( of which he is a
member) approves it.

(4) Threat to expertise- The expertise of specialized groups may be threatened by

changes in organization patterns. For example, a general manager may prefer to
make crucial decisions himself rather than delegating them to his subordinates due
to the fear dial decentralizing the process of decision-making would threaten his
expertise.

(5) Threat To Established Power Relationships - When an organization initiates a

redistribution of decision making authority, by removing the additional layers in
the hierarchy and implementing participative decision making, it is usually resisted
by middle level managers and supervisors. This is because, such a change takes
away the power and authority which they enjoyed in the bureaucratic system.

(6) Threat to established resource allocations- An individual (or a group) who

controls a significant amount of resources in the organization would generally
consider any change as a threat. It is the because of the fear that change will bring
an adverse impact on the pattern of resource allocation and will put him at a
disadvantage.
  Overcoming resistance

Management is said to be agent of change. It means that management has to

introduce change successfully in his organization. It has to overcame the resistance
and make it a successful venture, The management must realize that resistance to
change is basically a human problem, though on surface, it may appear to be
related to be technical aspects of change. So, it must be tackled in a human and
social manner, "There is nothing more difficult of success, not more dangerous to
handle than to initiate a new order of things." said Machiavelli. Inshort, the
following steps can be taken by management to facilitate change acceptance.

(1) Participation of Employees -Before introducing any change, the employees

should be fully consulted and they must be made a party to any such decision. The
meaning and purpose of the change must be fully communicated to those who will
be affected by it. Enough time should be allowed for discussion and pros and cons
of the change should be explained in detail.

(2) Planning for Change - Before implementing any change the management
should plan for it. People should get an opportunity to participate both in planning
the change and installing it. This will help the group of the affected people to
recognize the need for change and thus prepare them for receiving it without any
fear. The time, pace and quantum of change should be determined and the mode of
introduction of change should also be planned.

(3) Protection of their Interests- Management should ensure that employees will be
protected from economic loss in status or personal dignity. If these things are
protected, the degree of resistance to change will be very low.

(4) Group Dynamics-Group dynamics refers to the ever changing interactions and
adjustments in the mutual perceptions and relationships among members of the
groups. Such group interactions are the most powerful instrument which, facilitate
or inhibit adaptation to change. Adaptation is a team activity which requires
conformity to the new group norms, moves, traditions and work patterns, If these
could be positively articulated by management and group-based technique for
introduction of change are adopted, the results are likely to be more successful and
durable.
(5) Negotiation-Sometimes, resistance may be offered by powerful individuals or
groups who have the potential to nullify the effect of the change program. In such a
case, change agents may negotiate with them and offer them an attractive package
in exchange for their cooperation. But the change agents have to ensure that the
other parties do not begin to resist change only to avail themselves of benefits.

(6) Positive Motivation- The management should use the policy of positive
motivation to counteract negative resistance. It should be the attempt of the
management to make the job easier and less exerting. The management should
import proper training to its employees in new techniques and work technology etc.
The leadership styles should also be supportive and people oriented. This policy
will also bring down the resistance to change.

(7) Sharing the Benefits of Change- Any change whether technical, social or
economic will be least resisted by the employees if management permits the
employees to share benefits which arise out of the change. So, the management
must see that employees are not only assured of it, they are given due advantage
also of it.

(8) Taking Union Leaders into Confidence- Management is regarded as the agent
of change and unions are regarded as the forestallers of change. Hence, it would be
prudent(Sensible) for management to take the union leaders into confidence about
change.

Managing change
Step One-Anticipating Change: To start with the leaders of the organization are
expected to anticipate change by annualizing the external environment and
applying their intuitions to predict the change management can magnify the
opportunities and Minute the threats from the forces of change in the market place
by anticipating the change. The management can leverage the resources and
exploit opportunities for its own growth which is possible with superior skills of
anticipation.

Step Two: Identifying the Change -There organizational leaders are to identify the
changes and evaluate as to how their organization can match its strategy, structure,
systems, skills styles, staff and super-ordinate the goal to the external driving
forces of competitors, customers, contradictions and other conditions of the market
place. This calls for an Complex diagnosis of the organization in the backdrop of
changing environment. Wise leaders are bold and frank enough to question
themselves about their vulnerability to strategic changes.

Step Three: Selling the Change -There is dire need for selling the change through
effective communication to different executives and the employees at all the levels
to bring about change. It is effective communication that creates awareness about
change and to prepare the people for extending their wholehearted support through
commitment for change. Hence, it is up to the leaders at top to bring home the
benefits of change that accrue to the organisation and, therefore to the people who
make the organization.

Step Four: Mobilizing Resources for Change- Introduction of change can be

effective only when the people responsible build a team or sub-teams and
assimilate resources. The leader at the top has to involve the people at different
positions commanding authority.

Step Five: Breaking Down the Comfort Zones- The challenge of introducing
change is the crucial task of changing the mindset of people so that they feel
comfortable with old habits and the deep rooted practices, even when they are
misdirected. People prefer situation in order to avoid change. It is the inertia of
these situation seekers of doing something in a different way. Hence, it is the major
task of the lenders to break down these comfort zones through injecting and
support the sense of urgency. It can be done in different ways; one way to raise
organizational goal in terms of increased market share or revenue; another way is
to go in for professionals from outside for diagnosing the problem area and
bringing up the performance level. Again, managers at various levels are expected
to always question themselves of their perceptions and the existing practices.

Step Six: Reinforcing Change Success- In case the change leaders and change
teams are convinced of an early success, it is the proof of the fact that change has
worked. This gives a kick start and the momentum continues to propel and impel
change efforts pushing forward. This should be brought to the notice of people
which helps to get a lasting commitment to change.
Step Seven: Continuous Learning and Change - Effective implementation of
change warrants turning of an "existing" organization into "learning'" organization
and "creative" organization in which people learn continually and put forth their
new ideas which are innovative and creative and share these ideas with others. This
process can be further facilitated by making the organization structure more
flexible and easy gliding where people at different layers and at different points of
layers communicate freely, frankly and immaculately.

(i) Managing Change through Power- The application of power to bring about
change implies the use of coercion. In organizations, managers are generally
considered to be the ones who have access to power and who can use their power
to coerce non managers to change in the direction they desire. Managers can
implement power through their control over reward and sanctions. They can
determine the conditions of employment including promotion and advancement.
Consequently, through their, access to these bases of power, managers can bring to
bear considerable influence in an organisation.

The application of power is a Revelation of autocratic leadership and is generally

not held in high esteem in contemporary organisations. In times past, autocratic
management has been a factor in the rise of labour unions as counterweights to the
arbitrary use of managerial power. Except in crises situations when the very
existence of the organisation is at stake, power is not a favored approach for
bringing about change.

(ii) Managing Change through Reason -The application of reason to bring about
change is based on the dissemination of information prior to the intended change.
The underlying assumption is that reason alone will pass and that the participants
and parities to the change will all make the rational choice.

The reason-based approach appeals to the sensibilities of those who take a non-
material view of organisational worlds. But the reality of organisations requires
that we recognize the existence of individual motives and needs, group norms and
sanctions, and the fact that organisations exist as social as well as work units all of
which means that reason alone won't be sufficient to bring about change.

(iii) Managing Change through Re-education- The middle ground approach relies
upon re-education to improve the functioning of the organisation. Re-education
implies a particular set of activities that recognises that neither power nor reason
can bring about desirable change. This set of activities has been the subject of
much research and application and is generally understood to be the essence of
organisational development.